Hurrah for Sigs!

[cheezMcNASTY]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

dont like it

it's not so bad. if you've got a sig you can always resize it, same goes for text. you have spoiler tags at your disposal as well.
or, you can choose to ignore it altogether and add an oversized picture of 50-cent playing the accordion like i did (for a while). in that sense, it's kind of liberating.

besides, it's a slap on the wrist compared to some other site out there.

they get no scroll bar and have to abide strict rules under warning of penalty. we may not have been nearly as bad, but i think it's hard to complain.

 

[Angel]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

They get a scroll bar now

Over there, the signatures are stupid and people are really precious about them All three main sites now have this implemented and hopefully it will curb the stretching.

I do find it interesting how the people complaining are the ones who have to have the scroll bar because their sig exceeds the limits

 

[Azer249]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Haha i have to resize my new one because of the scroll bar of death but i think its a good idea.

 

[Arld]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

They get a scroll bar now

Over there, the signatures are stupid and people are really precious about them All three main sites now have this implemented and hopefully it will curb the stretching.

I do find it interesting how the people complaining are the ones who have to have the scroll bar because their sig exceeds the limits

Exactly, people shouldn't wine. Hell, over at FileFront, mods including myself will have to stick to a limit of 160 pixels in height, including text which counts as 12px. Be happy with what you've got, people.

 

[Aions]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

i just hate it when your scrolling down the page and then suddenly stop only to find that " oh i hit some ones sig, gotta scroll through that first" and it happens like 5-6 time b4 you even hit the bottem of the page

 

[Arld]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

You don't have to scroll through the signature. Just keep your mouse to the right or left and it's not a problem at all. And even if you do scroll through it, it's not longer than a fraction of a minute.

 

[Aions]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

You don't have to scroll through the signature. Just keep your mouse to the right or left and it's not a problem at all. And even if you do scroll through it, it's not longer than a fraction of a minute.

still bothers me

 

[Arseface]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Why didn't Steve point me to this thread when I was sending him annoying PMs about it?

I, predictably enough, dislike the scrollers. I don't see any reason to have them. Page stretching? We've got a width limit. Too long? I don't think my sig is too long. Besides, I think it's rather aesthetic. Page load an issue? Do they not load inside the scrollers anyway? From my point of view, I can't see a decent reason to have them. But, maybe thats just me.

As a paying user, I would like to either see the scroll limit increased, or abolished altogether. An ideal solution would be for users to have the option of whether they want the scrollers, but as Steve's already informed me, that's not an option, or at least not one that's easily implemented.

I know that makes it seem like I've got some massive issue with the scrollers, but I don't. I just don't like making a half-hearted complaint.

 

[DarkONI]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Why didn't Steve point me to this thread when I was sending him annoying PMs about it?

You self-answered yourself.

I, predictably enough, dislike the scrollers. I don't see any reason to have them. Page stretching?

You may dislike the ｢scroll｣. However, my Projectego.net forum navigation experience has been improved since.

We've got a width limit. Too long? I don't think my sig is too long.

You have a five-paragraphs signature with various images, huge-text word combinations and a spoiler, and this kind of signature classifies huge to me.

Besides, I think it's rather aesthetic. Page load an issue? Do they not load inside the scrollers anyway? From my point of view, I can't see a decent reason to have them. But, maybe thats just me.

Because long signatures make the whole navigation experience tiresome by scrolling upside down, also it's annoying that a page is huge because of the signatures instead of the posts.

As a paying user, I would like to either see the scroll limit increased, or abolished altogether. An ideal solution would be for users to have the option of whether they want the scrollers, but as Steve's already informed me, that's not an option, or at least not one that's easily implemented.

You can't demand anything as a "paying" User. You cannot define yourself one, because you simply donated to the website, which is not a payment but instead you simply support the website in a monetary manner.

However, yes there should be an option but that options primary value should be that the scroll is enabled.

 

[Arseface]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

You self-answered yourself.

"Annoying" was meant to be read in a sarcastic sense.

You may dislike the ｢scroll｣. However, my Projectego.net forum navigation experience has been improved since.

That may be true, but as long as it's one opinion versus another, no one can win the argument.

You have a five-paragraphs signature with various images, huge-text word combinations and a spoiler, and this kind of signature classifies huge to me.

Ok, so it's probably on the larger side. But I wouldn't say it makes the forums hard to navigate.

Because long signatures make the whole navigation experience tiresome by scrolling upside down, also it's annoying that a page is huge because of the signatures instead of the posts.

What's annoying to me is when I'm scrolling down, then all of a sudden it starts scrolling through an sig, and I have to move my mouse to the side.

Besides, we've had the sig system the way it was since at least 2007, why change it now?

You can't demand anything as a "paying" User. You cannot define yourself one, because you simply donated to the website, which is not a payment but instead you simply support the website in a monetary manner.

Donating gives you other priveliges, why not this one?

However, yes there should be an option but that options primary value should be that the scroll is enabled.

Agreed. Again, it's not a massive issue, and I can easily live with it. But as long as we're arguing, this is how I feel about it.

 

[DarkONI]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

I won't bother answering you, Arseface. I will hope someone else will. The reasons will sound obvious to anyone with a decent ｢IQ｣ .

 

[Arseface]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

I won't bother answering you, Arseface. I will hope someone else will. The reasons will sound obvious to anyone with a decent ｢IQ｣ .

You can't be bothered answering me, so you insult me instead? Yeeeeaaah...

 

[Arld]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Now now, both of you are mature enough to not resort to unnecessary arguments. Or am I shamefully wrong? I hope not.

Ok, so it's probably on the larger side. But I wouldn't say it makes the forums hard to navigate.

Partially true, in a way. Browsing experience, which is including navigating, increases if you don't have to scroll twice as much just to find the next post.

What's annoying to me is when I'm scrolling down, then all of a sudden it starts scrolling through an sig, and I have to move my mouse to the side.

And scrolling down repeatedly isn't annoying?

Besides, we've had the sig system the way it was since at least 2007, why change it now?

One thing everybody should know: administrators won't change the way features had worked for years for no actual reason. There is a reason behind it, which is well-explained in several posts.

Donating gives you other priveliges, why not this one?

You must understand that donating is donating -- not paying as mandatory. You're saying as if you were forced to and thus, deserve more rights than you already have (e.g. profile customization) regardless of the situation. You have done it as a volunteer, hence donating. Administrators aren't forced to reduce performance or general browsing experience because one another had donated. They do what is best for the site, whether there are no donators at all, or many.

What I'm getting at is, if you donate, it doesn't have to mean that you get more privileges than the administrators granted you. It would be, in the end, unfair toward others who did not donate, or couldn't donate (either for practical, logical or technical reasons).

That said, there is the possibility of writing a piece of code for the forum which sets a static width for the entire template hook ($template_hook[signature_start]). But as long as the administrators wish it this way, I'm all fine with it myself. I'm happy enough to be a part of ProjectEgo, and that's more than sufficient.

 

[Arseface]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Now now, both of you are mature enough to not resort to unnecessary arguments. Or am I shamefully wrong? I hope not.

I didn't think I was being immature. I thought I was presenting my points calmly and maturely.

Partially true, in a way. Browsing experience, which is including navigating, increases if you don't have to scroll twice as much just to find the next post.

True, but I don't think the problem was so debilitating as to warrant this.

And scrolling down repeatedly isn't annoying?

Ah, I see what you did there. The point is, I don't mind scrolling, as long as I'm getting somewhere with it. If my page stops scrolling every few seconds to scroll through a signature, then it starts getting annoying. For me at least.

One thing everybody should know: administrators won't change the way features had worked for years for no actual reason. There is a reason behind it, which is well-explained in several posts.

I don't think those reasons I saw were really worth changing it. But then, the complaints don't get sent to me, so I can't really comment on that.

You must understand that donating is donating -- not paying as mandatory. You're saying as if you were forced to and thus, deserve more rights than you already have (e.g. profile customization) regardless of the situation. You have done it as a volunteer, hence donating. Administrators aren't forced to reduce performance or general browsing experience because one another had donated. They do what is best for the site, whether there are no donators at all, or many.

What I'm getting at is, if you donate, it doesn't have to mean that you get more privileges than the administrators granted you. It would be, in the end, unfair toward others who did not donate, or couldn't donate (either for practical, logical or technical reasons).

I agree, and in hindsight, it probably was a bit arrogant of me to pull that card.

That said, there is the possibility of writing a piece of code for the forum which sets a static width for the entire template hook ($template_hook[signature_start]). But as long as the administrators wish it this way, I'm all fine with it myself. I'm happy enough to be a part of ProjectEgo, and that's more than sufficient.

Would it be possible to have a bit of code that checks whether the user is a gold supporter, and adjust it or remove it if that is the case?

 

[Arld]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Glad to see you agree with my view upon the matter. ^_^

Would it be possible to have a bit of code that checks whether the user is a gold supporter, and adjust it or remove it if that is the case?

Yes. In-fact, everything is possible as long as you know what you're doing. For instance, let's say we want to restrict free use of signatures to certain usergroups (assuming there is more than one), you'd want to add an if conditional around the code which defines the scrolling area in the signature, e.g.:

<if condition="in_array($post['usergroupid'], array(x,x,x))">code for the groups that need the scrolling bar<else />those who 'deserve' free use of the signature feature.</if>

Of course, vBulletin is a template-based system, meaning that certain variables, such as $post, aren't declared globally, and thus, can be used in certain templates, while these can't be used in certain others. $post['usergroupid'] is a mere example, as $post most likely won't work in signature_start; could easily redefine $post in a similar way for signatures specifically, through use of a written plug-in, or simply in the template itself.

 

[Arseface]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Glad to see you agree with my view upon the matter. ^_^

Yes. In-fact, everything is possible as long as you know what you're doing. For instance, let's say we want to restrict free use of signatures to certain usergroups (assuming there is more than one), you'd want to add an if conditional around the code which defines the scrolling area in the signature, e.g.:

<if condition="in_array($post['usergroupid'], array(x,x,x))">code for the groups that need the scrolling bar<else />those who 'deserve' free use of the signature feature.</if>

Of course, vBulletin is a template-based system, meaning that certain variables, such as $post, aren't declared globally, and thus, can be used in certain templates, while these can't be used in certain others. $post['usergroupid'] is a mere example, as $post most likely won't work in signature_start; could easily redefine $post in a similar way for signatures specifically, through use of a written plug-in, or simply in the template itself.

I see. I guess we'll have to wait for Steve to make an appearance for this to be finally sorted.

 

[cheezMcNASTY]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Gakoyu, you seem to be very knowledgeable of vBulletin. let me ask you this.
(yeah, i dislike how the scroll bar makes the signatures look)

would it be overly complicated to add an option of whether or not you want to have a scroll bar limit on signatures? that way we could have a scroll bar by default, and people who don't like it don't have to see it.

just a thought.

 

[Arld]

Re: Hurrah for Sigs!

Yes, as said, everything is possible. The only difference is the amount of time it would take to implement it. Not that it's overly complicated; just the amount of writing. It shouldn't be very hard; a possible way could be to add a field which acts as user profile field, except it doesn't actually serve as one. Then, write some code which checks the status of the checkbox (e.g. in User Options, found in UserCP). If it's enabled, do action X. If not, then do action Y.